Sorry, this deal has expired. Get notified of deals like this in the future. Add Deal Alert for this Item
Popular Deal

Intel Core i7-9700K (Amazon and Newegg) $349.99. Ends Friday

$349.99
+9 Deal Score
9,853 Views
Amazon and Newegg both are selling the 9700k for 349.99. This seems to happen intermittently and is the lowest historical price for the chip as far as I know. These deals seem to last about a day or so, and have been occurring about once a week or so.

At this price point, the 9700K is only about 20 dollars more expensive than the 3700X (although you'll need a cooler for the Intel chip).

This particular sale ends on Friday for Newegg. Amazon will most likely follow suit.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-9...way&sr=8-1

https://www.newegg.com/core-i7-9t...-_-Product
Share
Good deal?
You gave thanks to ElRancho for this post.
Thank you!
ElRancho posted this deal. Say thanks!
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
Deal
Score
+9
9,853 Views
$349.99

Back To School Savings are here!

Get huge savings on laptops, notebooks, and other back to school essentials.

View the Deals
About the OP
Send Message
Joined Nov 2017 L2: Beginner
22 Reputation Points
1 Deals Posted
40 Votes Submitted
30 Comments Posted
Don't have Amazon Prime? Students can get a free 6-Month Amazon Prime trial with free 2-day shipping, unlimited video streaming & more. If you're not a student, there's also a free 1-Month Amazon Prime trial available.

57 Comments

1 2 3 4

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Sep 2009
L7: Teacher
2,285 Posts
1,412 Reputation
Pro
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank ?
#2
Better chip for gaming than the 3700X (for most current games), but not sure if it's wise to buy a chip with no hyperthreading at this point in time. Would like to see a deal on the 9900K(F) and motherboard.
Reply Helpful Comment? 11 5
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2017
L2: Beginner
30 Posts
22 Reputation
Original Poster
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank ?
#3
Yep, I face the same dilemma.

For gaming, the 3600 is roughly 10% slower than the 9700k on games (avg and mins). It only costs $200 and needs no cooling.

The 3700x has 8 cores 16 threads, but at $320 it will offer less than 10% better FPS compared to the 3600, and thus should be about 8% slower than the 9700k....but it might age better due to all those cores and threads.
Reply Helpful Comment? 11 1
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2009
L3: Novice
204 Posts
93 Reputation
#4
Also keep in mind when comparing to the AMD 3700X, that the Intel 9700k also requires the purchase of a separate cpu cooler (since it doesn't come with one). The most cost effective is an air cooler which starts at around $30-40, while the AMD comes with a pretty good air cooler included (Wraith Prism).

If you plan to overclock significantly and water cool, you can skip the air cooler so less of an issue. But if you're running at stock speeds, 3700x is $329 vs $380+ for the Intel 9700k. Both good options, just don't forget the cooler if going Intel.

9700K also pulls 95 watts, while the 3700X runs at 65 watts Thermal Design Power (TDP), which "represents the average power, in watts, the processor dissipates when operating at Base Frequency with all cores active." AMD easier to keep cool and more energy efficient (but not super important given likely 500+ watt overall system load with a good graphics card).

PS - Many non-K versions of Intel chips come with CPU coolers, but the K-suffix ones are unlocked and designed for overclocking.
Reply Helpful Comment? 6 1
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users Show Post
HIDDEN
07-24-2019 at 09:32 PM
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jun 2009
L7: Teacher
2,532 Posts
312 Reputation
#6
Given the. We amd chips, I would need these to be under 300 before considering these. And 99000k under 350 before considering those. Harsh, but given the competition from amd, I am surprised these are still this expensive. Runs hotter, less secured, and on old process technology. I guess intel still needs to keep their investor happy.
Reply Helpful Comment? 5 4
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2011
L4: Apprentice
455 Posts
22 Reputation
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank ?
#7
Intel has done the bare minimum for quite some time now due to lack of competition from AMD. Finally Intel feels a lot of pressure and hopefully they can bring price cuts before the next round of processors.
Reply Helpful Comment? 11 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2006
L4: Apprentice
347 Posts
28 Reputation
#8
Quote from pthomas1991
:
Intel has done the bare minimum for quite some time now due to lack of competition from AMD. Finally Intel feels a lot of pressure and hopefully they can bring price cuts before the next round of processors.

Problem is Intel's road map points to end of 2021 for new CPUs for gaming
Reply Helpful Comment? 5 0
Last edited by dipperq July 25, 2019 at 05:53 AM.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2011
L4: Apprentice
455 Posts
22 Reputation
#9
Quote from dipperq
:
Problem is Intel's road map points to end of 2021 for new CPUs for gaming
Yes, I don't think they have been getting good yields on their new process node. So prices wont come down Frown
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2016
L2: Beginner
28 Posts
10 Reputation
#10
I bought a 9700k when it first came out. Sure there's no hyper-threading. Still a great chip. No regrets.
Reply Helpful Comment? 6 3
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Apr 2007
L10: Grand Master
6,217 Posts
2,159 Reputation
Pro
#11
Quote from vivisimonvi
:
Better chip for gaming than the 3700X (for most current games), but not sure if it's wise to buy a chip with no hyperthreading at this point in time. Would like to see a deal on the 9900K(F) and motherboard.
All the reviews I've seen show 1080p is the only resolution where Intel dominates. Otherwise it's all neck to neck.

I think I'm still going to stay with Intel. Already bought the Strix-E on Prime Day sale. I'm at the age where I just want everything to work without any compatibility issues like with the Rysen. I don't have the patience to google search for fixes or workarounds anymore. That and the high idle power draw really annoys me.
Reply Helpful Comment? 4 2
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jun 2017
L2: Beginner
46 Posts
10 Reputation
#12
isnt the ryzen a better deal esp for the new motherboards that are out?
Reply Helpful Comment? 3 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jul 2008
L5: Journeyman
905 Posts
509 Reputation
#13
Quote from ElRancho
:
Yep, I face the same dilemma.

For gaming, the 3600 is roughly 10% slower than the 9700k on games (avg and mins). It only costs $200 and needs no cooling.

The 3700x has 8 cores 16 threads, but at $320 it will offer less than 10% better FPS compared to the 3600, and thus should be about 8% slower than the 9700k....but it might age better due to all those cores and threads.
I have only been seeing around 6% difference in 1080p for 3700x non oc vs 9700k... I haven't gamed at 1080p since 2015 though, so those in the 2k/4k range like me will see almost no difference between the two processors but the 9700k uses over 100 more watts when both oc'd and 30-35 stock.

Intel is done for the next few iterations if they can't drop prices/raise gains. Of course there's always fanboys to sustain, but I am loving my 2600x, and now I can jump to a 3xxx with not much other cost if any. So glad to be able to move on from my 4790k, it's finally able to retire to the dust bin
Reply Helpful Comment? 2 1
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Apr 2016
L3: Novice
197 Posts
24 Reputation
#14
Quote from Baseball88
:
I bought a 9700k when it first came out. Sure there's no hyper-threading. Still a great chip. No regrets.
I also got my 9700k last holiday season on an eBay deal for around $344. Been a great chip, completely unlocked the performance of my gtx 1070 at 1440 vs my 4th generation i5.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Feb 2017
L2: Beginner
96 Posts
26 Reputation
#15
Quote from snowcrash
:
All the reviews I've seen show 1080p is the only resolution where Intel dominates. Otherwise it's all neck to neck.

I think I'm still going to stay with Intel. Already bought the Strix-E on Prime Day sale. I'm at the age where I just want everything to work without any compatibility issues like with the Rysen. I don't have the patience to google search for fixes or workarounds anymore. That and the high idle power draw really annoys me.
You know why intel dominates only 1080P, at higher resolutions, they performance about the same? Cuz current GPU are not fast enough at 1440P or 4K to max out the CPU. In theory, intel will still be faster at 1440P and 4K if we have a GPU that can run games at those resolutions at high fps just like 1080P
Reply Helpful Comment? 3 1
Page 1 of 4
1 2 3 4
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2019. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard